Following are excerpts from Secretary of State Cyrus R. Vance's testimony on Zimbabwe-Rhodesia delivered before the foreign affairs committees of the Senate and House :
As the president has said, there has been encouraging progress in Zimbabwe-Rhodesia. A step has been taken away from total white control and toward majority rule. For the first time in the history of that country, the white minority recognized the right of the black majority vote.
But this progress is not yet sufficient to justify our lifting sanctions . . .
The April elections were conducted on the basis of a constitution approved in January in a national referendum in which only whites were permitted to vote . . . It is enshrined in the constitution that there shall be 28 white members of the [100-member] House Assembly - 28 percent of the seats, reserved for less than 4 percent of the people . . .
The constitution gives the minority continued control over the army, the police, the system of justice and the civil service, and it also lets the 4 percent minority exercise a veto power over any significant constitutional reform . . .
Of the 170 clauses in the constitution, some 120 "entrenched clauses" can be changed only with the approval of 78 of the 100 members of the House."
[By permitting racial discrimination in family law, hiring, public expenditures and important aspects of criminal proceedings,] the Rhodesian constitution legalizes the treatment of black citizens as second-class citizens.
It is said that this is only a transitional, 10-year arrangement. But all that is promised in 10 years is a review to recommend changes. It will be carried out by a five-member commission, three of whom will almost certainly be white . . .
Our judgment about the elections is reinforced by an assessment of some of the conditions that prevailed during the election period . . . No Party could participate unless it first embraced the constitution adopted in January by white voters only. The two major opposition parties, ZAPU and ZANU, were outlawed for the seven months preceding the elections.
[Members of these parties were offered an amnesty] but it was conditioned on a requirement that they lay down their arms, accept the internal settlement and return home [to take part in elections controlled by their opponents].
Both sides have engaged in acts of violence that inhibited peaceful negotiations. Both sides have sought dominance rather than accommodation.